Hill jets may be scrapped

After an uproar over a proposed purchase of new executive jets for use by senior government officials, including members of Congress, the top Defense appropriator in the House has offered to eliminate funding for the planes — but only if the Pentagon, which operates the jets, agrees.

Story Continued Below

“If the Department of Defense does not want these aircraft, they will be eliminated from the bill,” Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), the chairman of the Defense Appropriations subcommittee, said Monday evening.

Murtha was quick to point out that these jets, approved by the full House last month, were not additions to the current group of 24 executive aircraft already used for top officials, and were being purchased to replace older ones that have maintenance and safety issues.

And in his statement, Murtha basically put the blame on the Pentagon, whose spokesman has been quoted saying that the House Appropriations Committee added four executive jets beyond the Pentagon’s original request. The Defense Department originally requested $220 million for four jets — a total bumped to $550 million and eight jets by the committee.

“These aircraft will not increase the overall passenger aircraft fleet, but instead will replace older aircraft that have both safety and maintenance issues,” Murtha said. “In addition, these newer model aircraft cost significantly less to operate than the current aircraft.”

Murtha also needled the Pentagon a bit, saying that “85 percent” of the use of these aircraft comes from the executive branch, and not Congress.

Murtha’s move may end what has been an embarrassing uproar for House appropriators, who approved the Defense spending bill with no objection about the congressional jets. There is already a movement in the Senate to kill the funding for the aircraft.

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) said the funding “kind of makes me sick to my stomach,” and has vowed to kill it. Sens. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.), both senior members of the Armed Services Committee, have also voiced their opposition to the plan.

The controversy is not going unnoticed in the Senate Democratic leadership circles either. Senate insiders said the Senate Appropriations Committee is unlikely to approve the additional plane funding, although Sen. Dan Inouye (D-Hawaii), the chairman of the panel, was unavailable for comment on Monday.

Yet when the Pentagon-spending bill was taken up by the House, first in the Defense subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, then the full committee, and finally on the chamber floor, the executive-plane provision attracted no notice and no opposition emerged from either side of the aisle.

The full House Appropriations Committee, in fact, marked up the Pentagon bill in 15 minutes with no amendments.

Even Rep. Jeff Flake (Ariz.), an outspoken critic of congressional “earmarks” who offered more than 500 amendments to cut wasteful spending in the defense bill, had nothing to say about the plane provision when the overall package was being debated on the House floor. Flake ended up voting against the defense bill on final passage.